File 19 Traffic Transport Assessment

8/13/2019 File 19 Traffic Transport Assessment

1/409

WYGTransport Planning

Proposed ResidenShelford Road Farm, R


2/409


REPORT CONTROL

Project: Proposed Residential Development Shelford Road Trent

Client: William Davis Ltd

Job Number: A079137

File Origin: N:\Projects\A079137 Shelford Road Farm, Radcliffe on Trent\repoTA\RT79137-04 Transport Assessment.doc

Document Checking:

Primary Author Jamie Cassie Initialled:

Contributor - Initialled:

Review By Colin Shields Initialled:

I D S Ch k d


3/409


Contents

1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................2 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ...........................................................4 PLANNING POLICY .........................................................................5 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT .............................................................6 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT ....................................................7 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................

Tables

Table 1 2013 Junction Capacity Assessment Results .........................................

Table 2 Local Bus Services ...............................................................................

Table 3 2026 Do Minimum Junction Capacity Assessment Results ......................

Table 4 Proposed Development Person Trip Rates and Trip Generation ..............

Table 5 Proposed Development Trip Generation by Mode ..................................

Table 6 Primary School & Medical Centre Trip Rates and Trip Generation............

Table 7 2026 Do Something Junction Capacity Assessment Results ...................

Table 8 Proposed Junction Improvements Capacity Assessment Results .............

Figures

Figure 1 Site Location Plan

Figure 2 2013 Base Traffic Flows

Figure 3 2km Walking Catchment

Figure 4 4km Cycling Catchment

Figure 5 2026 Base Traffic Flows


4/409


Appendices

Appendix A Shelford Road Vehicle Speed SurveysAppendix B Traffic Count SurveysAppendix C 2013 Junction Capacity Assessments

Appendix D Personal Injury Accident DataAppendix E Proposed Site Access JunctionAppendix F Bus Service DetailsAppendix G Committed Development DataAppendix H 2026 Do Minimum Junction Capacity AssessmentsAppendix I TRICS DataAppendix J Trip Distribution/AssignmentAppendix K 2026 Do Something Junction Capacity AssessmentsAppendix L Proposed Junction Improvements Capacity Assessments


5/409


1 INTRODUCTION1.1 PREAMBLE1.1.1 WYG has been appointed by William Davis Ltd to prepare a Tr

Residential Travel Plan to support the proposed development of a m

dwellings, a primary school and a medical centre on land to the s

Radcliffe on Trent, Nottinghamshire. A site location plan is attached a

1.1.2 Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC) is the local highway autRushcliffe Borough Council (RBC) is the local planning authority. Rad

north of the A52 Trunk Road, the operation and maintenance of wh

the Highways Agency (HA). Scoping discussions have been held with

the key parameters and methodology for this TA. This TA has ther

undertaken on an agreed basis

1.1.3 This TA report demonstrates that the proposed development site isaccess to public transport and local facilities and that the proencourage travel by all modes of transport, particularly alternative mo

terms of traffic impact by the private car; assessments have been ca

junctions, as agreed with NCC and the HA:

Shelford Road/Bingham Road/Hunts Close/Main Street mi A52 / Nottingham Road traffic signals A52 / Stragglethorpe Road traffic signals A52/A6011 Gamston roundabout

1.1.4 This TA has been prepared in accordance with the joint Department o


6/409


Sustainable accessibility promote accessibility by all modpublic transport, cycling and walking; assess the likely t

pattern to and from the proposed site; and develop

influence travel behaviour;

Dealing with residual trips provide accurate quantitativeof the predicted impacts of residual trips from the pro

ensure that suitable measures are proposed to manage the

Mitigation measures ensure as much as possible thatmeasures avoid unnecessary physical improvements to

innovative and sustainable transport solutions.

1.2 REPORT LAYOUT1.2.1 This TA investigates the highways and transportation issues assoc

residential development. The layout of the study is as follows:

Section 2 describes existing conditions; The development proposals are outlined in Section 3, Current local and national policy documents are reviewed w Section 5 investigates the sustainable transport facilities a

of the site and details potential Travel Plan measures;

Section 6 assesses the impact of residual development tnetwork; and

Section 7 summarises the report.


7/409


2 EXISTING CONDITIONS2.1 EXISTING HIGHWAY NETWORK

Shelford Road

2.1.1 The site is located on land to the south of Shelford Road and liesvillage of Radcliffe on Trent. The site currently comprises Shelford R

to the north by Shelford Road, open fields to the east, the Nottingh

line to the south and existing residential development (Clumber Drive

2.1.2 Shelford Road is a county road that forms a link between Radcliffe othe south-west, and the hamlet of Newton plus the A46 Trunk Road

the proposed development site frontage, Shelford Road has an o

approximately 11.3 metres, comprising a 1.8m wide footway to

carriageway and a 1.2m footway plus 2m wide verge to the south

side).

2.1.3 Shelford Road is subject to a 30mph speed limit along the vast development frontage, changing to 60mph towards the eastern bo

are street lighting columns on both sides of the urban section of She

no parking restrictions along the route.

2.1.4 The residential properties along the northern side of the route all haonto Shelford Road and all of the properties have off-street parking f

street parking does not appear to be an issue in the area. There

parking lay-by along the south side of Shelford Road towards the wes

2 2 TRAFFIC DATA


8/409


2.2.2 Weekday average peak hour flows were recorded as 219 vehicles norsouthbound during the morning peak hour and 336 vehicles north

southbound during the evening peak hour. It can therefore be seen

in nature with a 60/40 split to/from the south (Radcliffe village) d

hours.

2.2.3 Traffic speed surveys were undertaken by WYG on Shelford Road on and Thursday 1 November 2012 to establish the 85thpercentile wet w

on the route and subsequently identify the visibility requirements for

junction. The speed survey was undertaken from the existing fa

speeds of 100 vehicles in each direction on each day.

2.2.4 The results of the speed survey are contained in Appendix Aand percentile wet weather speed of vehicles is 34-35mph northbound an

For these vehicle speeds, a visibility splay of 90 metres would be req

junction (in accordance with DMRB document TD42/95).

2.2.5 Traffic flows at the Shelford Road/ Main Road / Bingham Road / Hujunction in the centre of Radcliffe on Trent were obtained through th

period turning counts at the junction on Thursday 8 November 2012.

are contained inAppendix B.

2.2.6 Traffic flows on the A52 corridor have been obtained from the HA year of 2009. These flows have then been growthed to 2013 using

(NTM) factors adjusted by local TEMPRO growth factors (Radcliffe o

surveyed flows are included in Appendix B, with the 2013 mornin

flows for the highway network study area being shown on Figure 2.


9/409


2.3 2013 JUNCTION CAPACITY ASSESSMENTS2.3.1 Capacity assessments have been undertaken at the junctions liste

establish the existing weekday peak hour operation of the local highw

assessments for the roundabout junctions have been undertaken usi

programme. This is the industry standard traffic modelling compute

for assessing roundabout junctions.

2.3.2 For roundabout junctions a Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) value bejunction operates within its theoretical capacity. Typically junctions

with RFC values between 0.85 and 1.00, whilst an RFC value greater

junction operates above its capacity.

2.3.3 The assessment of the off-site signal-controlled junctions has beLINSIG computer programme, which is an industry standard tr

software packages used for assessing the traffic capacity of signalised

2.3.4 For LINSIG assessments, the operation of individual junction arms Degree of Saturation (DoS), whereas overall junction performance i

Capacity (RC) or degree of overload to indicate whether or not a jun

theoretical capacity. The RC is the percentage of all round traffic gro

accommodate within its capacity. When there is no RC, a degree of o

by which the traffic flows exceed the capacity of the junction. Exper

at existing junctions indicates that queuing does not become partic

degree of overload reaches 10% (i.e. -10% RC and a DoS of 100

comparison, it can be assumed that a RC of 0% (and a DoS of 90%)

of 0.85.

2 3 5 The full capacity assessment results are included as Appendix C and


10/409


Table 1 2013 Junction Capacity Assessment Results

JunctionAM Peak (08:00 09:00)

MaximumRFC/RC

MaximumQueue

Shelford Road/Bingham Road/HuntsClose/Main Road mini roundabout

0.664 2

A52 / Nottingham Road traffic signals 9.7% 19 A52 / Stragglethorpe Road traffic signals -29.0% 113

A52/A6011 Gamston roundabout 0.914 10

2.3.6 It can be seen from the above that the mini-roundabout junction in centre operates with some spare capacity during the morning and ev

A52 Gamston roundabout junction is approaching capacity during botthe A52/Stragglethorpe Road junction operates above theoretical c

periods. This corresponds with on-site observations and local kn

network in the area.

2.4 ACCIDENT HISTORY2.4.1 Personal injury accident data was obtained from NCC for the length

point approximately mile to the north of the site up to (and includ

junction with Bingham Road, Hunt Close and Main Road. The data ob

between 1 January 2007 and 31 May 2012 and indicated that there

accidents along this 2.5km length of Shelford Road during this per

included asAppendix D.

2.4.2 A total of three accidents were recorded at the Shelford Road mini-Bingham Road, Hunt Close and Main Road. All of the accidents resulte

single accident involving a pedestrian and a single accident invo

pedest ian accident in ol ed a ca t ning left f om Main Road to


11/409


pedal cycle with no other vehicles involved, another involved t

motorcycle in icy conditions (no other vehicle involved), and the th

involved a collision between vehicles travelling in opposite direction

Shelford Road, approximately 600m to the north-east of the proposed

2.4.4

The 6 recorded slight injury accidents occurred at various locations aof the accidents involved pedestrians crossing the carriageway (altho

was on Clumber Road near to the junction with Shelford Road). O

injury accidents, one involved a collision between a vehicle turnin

Avenue and a vehicle travelling along Shelford Road, one involved

vehicle was waiting to turn right off Shelford Road to New Road, and

control of a single vehicle in icy conditions.

2.4.5 For the A52 corridor, accident data was obtained from the HA for t2008 to 31 December 2011. The accident data is also included

following paragraphs summarise the accident records at the thre

included in the study area of this TA.

2.4.6 At the A52/Nottingham Road traffic signal junction there has been accident in the 4-year period analysed. The accident was a slight inju

as a result of a vehicle turning right out of Nottingham Road acro

travelling eastbound on the A52. It is not clear from the accident de

green light at the time of the accident.

2.4.7 A total of 10 injury accidents were recorded at the A52/Stragglethorthe 4-year period analysed. Two of the recorded accidents resulted in

of the accidents resulting in slight injuries. The two serious injury ac

loss of control of a single vehicle, with one accident resulting in a c


12/409


2.4.9 At the Gamston roundabout junction there have been a total oaccidents in the 4-year period, all of which resulted in slight injurie

involved a vehicle entering the junction across the path of a circu

accidents involved rear end collisions and two of the accidents involv

vehicle. None of the accidents involved vulnerable road users

although two of the accidents did involved motorcycles.

Accident Summary

2.4.10 Overall, it is not considered that a particular accident problem exianalysed and that there are no highway safety issues that would be e

additional traffic generated by the development proposed.

2.4.11 A number of the accidents at the A52/Stragglethorpe Road junctionvehicle speeds, with this section of the A52 being subject to a 7

cameras were installed on the A52 between Radcliffe on Trent and

2006 to monitor average vehicle speeds over this section of th

advanced warning signs on both the A52 approaches to the junctipresence of traffic signals and there is high friction surfacing on bo

the signal junction. It is therefore considered that appropriate ro

already in place at the junction.


13/409


3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS3.1 INTRODUCTION3.1.1 The development proposals consist of a maximum of 400 new res

pupil Primary School and a Medical Centre for 6-7 GPs.

3.2 PROPOSED SITE ACCESS3.2.1 Following earlier access feasibility work, NCC expressed a desire to

this location accessed via a three-arm roundabout on Shelford Road t

boundary of the site. A proposed roundabout layout is shown inAppe

3.2.2 The proposed site access roundabout will act as a traffic managemethe urban area, encouraging reduced vehicle speeds on the appr

proposed roundabout will be complemented by appropriate village

existing change in speed limit. This will be in the form of a minor

speed limit further east and enhanced signing and lining works.

3.2.3 The design and layout of the proposed site access roundabout modified through consultation with NCC and the layout has been the

Safety Audit by NCC.

3.3 PEDESTRIAN / CYCLE ACCESS3.3.1 In addition to providing pedestrian and cycle access to the propose

any proposed vehicular access, it is also recommended that direct a

links are provided from the site to the existing bus stops on Shelford

3.3.2 A traffic free pedestrian and cycle link will be provided between the p


14/409


will be designed to facilitate bus access if it is required. The bus rou

development on the primary route, or a turning facility provided close

centre.

3.4.2 The development will be designed in a manner to ensure that it is adominated by the car. The area is to be designed so as it meets the there rather than the motorcar.

3.5 SERVICE AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES3.5.1 Service and emergency vehicles will gain access to the developme

access on Shelford Road.

3.6 PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND OTHER MOBILITY IMPA3.6.1 The detailed design of the development and its internal transpo

undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the 1995 (a

Discrimination Act and in accordance with current good practice as e

Inclusive Mobility document.

3.6.2 This approach will ensure that the completed development is fullyneeds of all users, including those with disabilities or temporary mob

those escorting elderly people or young children.

3.6.3 The requirement to design for disabled people will permeate all aspeand will include access to and movement within the site, the

development and the surrounding highway network, and, in particu

and public transport facilities.

3 7 PARKING


15/409


3.7.3 Cycle parking will be provided within each individual dwelling plot, wspace provided for each dwelling. Cycle parking will also be provided


16/409


4 PLANNING POLICY4.1 PREAMBLE4.1.1 This chapter examines national and local transport policies conside

proposed development. Consideration has been given in the prep

Assessment to the following documents:

National Planning Policy Framework; Rushcliffe Local Plan; Nottinghamshire Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2026).

4.1.2 A summary of these policies is provided below.4.2 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)4.2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework was published on 27 Ma

guidance for local planning authorities and decision-takers both in

plans and as a material consideration in determining applications. Thplanning policy statements and planning policy guidance, including PP

4.2.2 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable transport, one of the core planning principles is to actively manage p

the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cyclin

development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.

4.2.3 The NPPF states that all developments which generate significanshould supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessmen

should be located where the need to travel will be minimised an


17/409


by sustainable modes of transport. The inclusion of a primary school

site also reduces the need to travel for residents of the proposed de

the residual cumulative impacts of the development are considered no

4.3 RUSHCLIFFE LOCAL PLAN4.3.1 The Rushcliffe Local Plan will set out the spatial planning policie

Borough in the period to 2026. The key strategic planning documen

Core Strategy, which indicates the numbers and broad locations of ne

the plan period.

4.3.2 A publication version of the Core Strategy was submitted to the Sec2012. However, following serious concerns expressed by the Secr

soundness of the housing policies, the examination in public is cur

this period of suspension the Council will be consulting on proposal

target and allocate additional development at land south of Clifto

Edwalton and land east of Gamston.

4.3.3 The publication version of the Core Strategy includes for resideplanning permission has already been granted at Edwalton (1,200

Colliery (470 dwellings), together with other major residential sites

dwellings), RAF Newton (550 homes) and land south of Clifton (2,

Trent is defined within the Core Strategy document as a key settlem

of growth for a minimum of 400 dwellings.

4.3.4 Policy 13 of the Core Strategy relates to managing travel demand antravel, especially by private car, will be reduced by securing new dev

scale in the most accessible locations following the Spatial Strategy i

with the delivery of sustainable transport networks to serve these


18/409


sufficient package of measures to ensure that journeys by non

encouraged, and that residual car trips will not unacceptably compro

system in terms of its effective operation.

4.3.6 The proposed development on land off Shelford Road accords with by providing up to 400 dwellings in one of the key settlements in th

accompanying Residential Travel Plan, will seek to accord with the

sustainable travel as set out in policies 13 and 14 by seeking to

measures and improvements to sustainable travel modes b

enhancements.

4.4 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN 2011-20264.4.1 The third Nottinghamshire Local Transport Plan (LTP) details the t

County for the period between 2011 and 2026. The LTP consists of

the local transport strategy detailing how transport improvements

county; and an implementation plan setting out the types of measur

will be prioritised to deliver the local transport strategy.

4.4.2 The local transport strategy identifies the A52 through RadcliffNottinghamshires strategic road network and suggests that the ro

levels. The local transport strategy also adopts a hierarchical app

sustainable transport networks, with preference given to area wide

and improvements to public transport services, and walking and cyc

highway capacity enhancements. The strategy also encourages th

travel plans as part of new developments.


19/409


5 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT5.1 INTRODUCTION5.1.1 This section considers the existing level of sustainable transport in th

development as well as considering those measures that could p

patterns in the delivery of sustainable transport to the site.

5.2 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES5.2.1 The Institution of Highways and Transportation in their document G

Journeys on Foot state that walking accounts for over a quarter of a

of journeys less than one mile. The document also provides guidandistances and suggests that a preferred maximum walking distance

commuting or school trips.

5.2.2 It can be concluded therefore that distances up to 2km can be conundertaken on foot, and that walking is a realistic mode to cons

distance. Whilst this does not preclude pedestrians from undertakconsidered that a distance of 2km is reasonable.

5.2.3 A 2km walking catchment is presented in Figure 3. This indidevelopment site is within a reasonable walking distance of the follo

facilities:

Radcliffe on Trent village centre South Nottinghamshire Academy School Radcliffe Infant and Nursery School Radcliffe on Trent Junior School


20/409


Road close to the mini-roundabout junction with Main Road that o

6pm, Monday to Saturday, and can accommodate 16-17 cars.

5.2.5 There are footways on both sides of Shelford Road between the prthe village centre and these are generally of a minimum width of 2m,

section (100m) on the south side of Shelford Road between the junc

and Oak Tree Avenue where the width reduces to approximately 1.5m

5.2.6 There are no formal pedestrian crossing facilities along Shelford Rcentral pedestrian refuges with dropped crossings and tactile pavin

Main Road and Hunt Close arms of the mini-roundabout junction in

zebra crossing on a raised speed table on the Bingham Road approac

5.2.7 The level of pedestrian accessibility will help to encourage a proporwithin the area to be made by foot. It is considered that travel on foo

travel for trips to Radcliffe on Trent. Walking should therefore be

appropriate mode of travel for local trips.

5.3 CYCLE FACILITIES5.3.1 The topography of the area in the immediate vicinity of the site

sustainable transport option, thus helping to encourage sustainable tr

5.3.2 In much the same way as pedestrian trip lengths are defined, the lengoverned by routes that are available and trip length, although a num

mitigate for or against making these trips.

5.3.3 The DfT in their Transport Statistics on Cycling in Great Britain statof a cycle journey is 2.4 miles (3.84km). It can therefore be conclude


21/409


5.4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROUTES AND FACILITIESBus

5.4.1 The Institute of Highways and Transportations (IHT) document Plain Developments states that new developments should be located

trips involve a walking distance of less than 400m from the nearest bu

5.4.2 The nearest bus stops to the site are located on Shelford Road, with bthe carriageway located at the western boundary of the site and

northbound carriageway close to the eastern boundary of the site. T

the Radcliffe Line service between Nottingham and Bingham operate

a 60 minute frequency service that operates between 6am and 9pm,

5.4.3 There are also bus stops located on Clumber Drive within 200m of the proposed development site. These stops are served by a version

runs between Nottingham and Radcliffe on Trent. The service operat

60 minute frequency, Monday to Saturday, between 7am and 6.30pm

5.4.4 The relevant bus service timetables are contained inAppendix F asummarised below inTable 2.

Table 2 Local Bus Services

Service

No. Route

Mon - Sat (min

Daytime(6am to 9pm)

RadcliffeLine

Nottingham - Radcliffe on Trent EastBridgford - Bingham

60

Radcliffe


22/409


5.4.6 It is also noted that the current services do not operate after 9pSundays and this was reflected in feedback received at a public co

development proposals held at St. Marys Hall in Radcliffe on Trent o

It is therefore proposed that bus service enhancements are p

development. Funding for the service enhancements will be prov

contribution of 300,000, secured as part of the S106 obligadevelopment. This sum would provide for an additional bus for a peri

5.4.7 The internal highway layout will be designed to accommodate bus abus route could loop through the development on the primary ro

provided close to the school and health centre, and a bus stop w

these facilities.

5.4.8 In terms of bus stop infrastructure, it is proposed that improvementclosest bus stops to the development on Shelford Road. The improv

provision of appropriate shelters, seating, information display cases

kerbs at the stops.

5.4.9 It is also proposed that residents of the development will be issueTravel Pack that would include details of the local bus services, p

redeemed for two, free, bus taster tickets per household.

Rail

5.4.10 The nearest rail station to the site is Radcliffe on Trent, which is locathe south-east of the proposed site off Shelford Road. The station

Grantham rail line and there are irregular daytime rail services to No

and Grantham (6 trains a day).


23/409


development. This is reflected by the local census travel to work

which suggests that only 1.4% of the existing resident population trav

5.5 SUMMARY5.5.1 The location of the site is such that existing sustainable travel oppo

wide range of local facilities and amenities (schools, shops, etc) being

or cycle distance of the proposed development.

5.5.2 Bus stops are located within 400m of the proposed developmenfrequency of 3 buses per hour to Nottingham during the main wo

development could generate an increase in peak hour demand

passengers and this increase in demand may result in a requirement provision. It is therefore proposed that a S106 contribution o

for local bus service enhancements and provision will be ma

access the proposed development.


24/409


6 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT6.1 ASSESSMENT YEAR6.1.1 In accordance with the DfT/DCLG Guidance on Transport Ass

assessment year in respect of capacity analysis for the transport netw

with the size, scale and completion schedule of the proposed develop

the LDF.

6.1.2 The scale of development proposed (400 dwellings) would be providit is considered reasonable that the full development would be comp

the LDF period, which is 2026. It is therefore proposed that the futu

respect of capacity analysis for the transport network is 2026.

6.2 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH6.2.1 Traffic flows on the highway network for a future year of 2026 have

National Transport Model (NTM) factors adjusted by local TEMPRO gr

Trent area) to the 2013 baseline flows. The resulting growth factors a

AM 2013 to 2026 = 1.171 PM 2013 to 2026 = 1.173

6.2.2 The 2026 weekday morning and evening peak hour background traffare shown on Figure 5.

6.3 COMMITTED DEVELOPMENTS6.3.1 Committed schemes are defined as developments or transport schem

planning consent, but which are, as yet, unimplemented or incomplet


25/409


Former Cotgrave Colliery 470 dwellings plus 4.5ha employm

6.3.3 Peak hour traffic flow information for the local highway network hasrelevant transport assessments for each of the above developments.

of committed infrastructure improvements associated with the

improvements to the A52/Stragglethorpe Road junction and the A

junction. The various traffic flows and infrastructure improveme

committed developments are contained inAppendix Gof this report

6.3.4 It should be noted that the combined impact of committed devexceeds the TEMPRO forecast background traffic growth on parts o

period between 2013 and 2026. Therefore, in order to avoid a doub

development flows in the forecasts of background traffic growth, th

constrained to the local TEMPRO growth factors.

6.4 2026 WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT JUNCTION CAPACITY ASS6.4.1 The junction assessments carried out at the junctions listed in parag

been repeated using the 2026 traffic flows shown in Figure 5. The

also include for the committed infrastructure improvements at the

and A52 Gamston roundabout junctions. The results of the assessme

Appendix Hand summarised in Table 3, below.

Table 3 2026 Do Minimum Junction Capacity Assessment R

JunctionAM Peak (08:00 09:00) MaximumRFC/RC

MaximumQueue

Shelford Road/Bingham Road/HuntsClose/Main Road mini roundabout

0.798 4

A52 / Nottingham Road traffic signals 6 6% 29


26/409


infrastructure improvements to the A52 Gamston roundabout juncti

operating better than in the 2013 peak periods, although the

approaching capacity in both peak periods.

6.5 TRIP GENERATION6.5.1 The proposed development comprises up to 400 dwellings on land a

built up area in Radcliffe on Trent. It is expected that the developme

of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings and there would be an element of a

site, in accordance with the requirements of the local planning author

6.5.2 In view of the above, the Houses privately owned land use categoand any sites in town centre or edge of town centre locations weLondon or outside of England were also excluded as unrepresentati

resulted in a sample size of 5 sites, with 5 weekday surveys. The T

Appendix Iand the resulting person trip rates (per dwelling) are sho

Table 4 Proposed Development Person Trip Rates and Trip G

Time Period

Person Trip Rates(per dwelling)

Pe

Arrival Departure 2-Way Arrival

AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) 0.235 0.837 1.072 94

PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) 0.584 0.367 0.951 234

6.5.3 In order to obtain the likely peak hour trip generation by mode odevelopment, travel to work data for the resident population of the

from the local census (2001). The existing travel to work percentage

peak hour trip generation, by mode, is shown in Table 5, below.


27/409


Table 5 Proposed Development Trip Generation by Mode

Mode of Travel Modal SplitAM Peak (08:00-09:00)

Arrivals Departures

Car Driver 69.9% 66 234

Car Passenger 7.2% 7 24

Walk 5.1% 5 17

Cycle 3.6% 3 12

Bus 11.4% 11 38

Rail 1.4% 1 5

Other 1.4% 1 5

Total 100% 94 335

6.5.4 It can be seen from the above that the predicted vehicular trip geneproposed development would be 300 trips (two-way) during a typic

hour and 266 trips (two-way) during a typical weekday evening pe

peak hour vehicular trip rates of 0.164 arrivals and 0.585 depart

morning peak hour and 0.408 arrivals and 0.257 departures per dw

hour.

6.5.5 It should be noted that the above vehicular trip generation does not modal shift that could be expected as a result of the introduction

measures/initiatives in association with the proposed development.

6.5.6 For the Primary School and Medical Centre, vehicular trip rates haveTRICS database. For the proposed Primary School, sites in sub

( l di L d ) ith b t 150 d 300 il l t d


28/409


Table 6 Primary School & Medical Centre Trip Rates and Tri

Primary School

Time Period

Vehicle Trip Rates(per pupil)

Ve


AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) 0.392 0.279 0.671 82

PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) 0.007 0.026 0.033 2

Medical Centre

Time Period

Vehicle Trip Rates(per GP)

Ve


AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) 4.121 2.242 6.363 29

PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) 1.545 2.394 3.939 11

6.5.8 It should be noted that the traffic flows associated with both the prcentre have been assigned to the proposed site access roundabou

additional facilities that are already available in Radcliffe village and

trips generated by these facilities would simply be transferred from

highway network. The only new trips likely to be generated by the f

the proposed dwellings and, to ensure a worse case assessment, no

to the trip generation for these internal trips.

6.6 VEHICULAR TRIP DISTRIBUTION6.6.1 Development-related vehicle trips have been distributed onto the hi

to journey to work patterns recorded within the 2001 census f

percentage of residents travelling to each employment location ward

development traffic generation and traffic assigned to the most log


29/409


Shelford Road East = 22.7% Radcliffe upon Trent = 12.5%

6.6.3 The resulting peak hour development trips on the local highway netw6, with the 2026 plus proposed development flows shown on Figure

6.7 2026 DO SOMETHING JUNCTION CAPACITY ASSESSMENT6.7.1 The capacity assessments at the off-site highway junctions, plus

roundabout, were then repeated for the with development scenario

from Figure 7. The results of the assessments are contained in Ap

below containing a summary of the results.

Table 7 2026 Do Something Junction Capacity Assessment


MaximumRFC/RC

MaximumQueue

Shelford Road / Site Access Roundabout 0.427 1

Shelford Road/Bingham Road/HuntsClose/Main Road mini roundabout 1.081 40

A52 / Nottingham Road traffic signals -17.7% 56

A52 / Stragglethorpe Road traffic signals -56.3% 247

A52/A6011 Gamston roundabout 0.934 13

6.7.2 It can be seen from the above that the proposed development accesRoad would operate with spare capacity during both the weekday m

hours. The impact of development generated traffic at each of th

follows:

Shelford Road/Main Road mini-roundabout would be op


30/409


A52 / Stragglethorpe Road signals would be operating abpeak periods; queue lengths increased by between 31 an

required);

A52/A6011 Gamston roundabout Approaching capacity durthe committed infrastructure improvements mean that the ju

with similar capacity to the 2013 scenario (no mitigation requ

6.7.3 In order to mitigate the impact of development generated traffic on tthe following works are proposed:

Shelford Road/Main Road conversion of the mini-roundasignal junction, including the removal of the existing zebra c

and provision of controlled pedestrian crossings on all appro

Figure 8);

A52 / Nottingham Road signals Addition of A52 left turn fiflare length on Nottingham Road approach (scheme shown o

A52 / Stragglethorpe Road signals Addition of left turn approach and increase in right turn lane capacity on A52 eas

shown onFigure 10);

6.7.4 In addition to the proposed junction improvements, it is also proposcalming scheme along Shelford Road to reduce vehicle speeds alon

safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists. A potential scheme

The traffic calming proposals have been developed following com

public consultation event into the development proposals in July 201

have been undertaken for the potential traffic calming scheme show

is proposed that the developers of the site would provide a


31/409


Table 8 Proposed Junction Improvements Capacity Assessm


MaximumRFC/RC

MaximumQueue

Shelford Road/Bingham Road/HuntsClose/Main Road traffic signals

0.7% 21

A52 / Nottingham Road traffic signals -13.9% 44

A52 / Stragglethorpe Road traffic signals -49.2% 220

6.7.6 Comparison of the results in Table 7 with those in Table 3 indicatesbe achieved at the Shelford Road/Main Road and A52/Stragglethor

the critical peak hours. At the A52/Nottingham Road junction full mit

in the evening peak hour, with partial mitigation being achieved in

However, it should be noted that the proposed junction improvem

assuming that there is no modal shift towards sustainable travel mo

development.

6.7.7 During pre-application discussions on the development proposals withthe view was expressed by the highway authority that every effort traffic going through Newton village. The traffic distribution used

22.7% of development generated traffic would be to/from the north

investigation of the origins/destinations of this traffic reveals that 5.

Newton Main Street, with a further 9.4% routing either via Newton M

Lane (to the A52). The remaining 7.9% would most likely use the A60

6.7.8 The potential impact of development traffic on Newton Main Street isand 14.5% of development traffic, which equates to between 15 and

peak hour and between 14 and 39 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour.

f f


32/409


6.7.10 In view of the above, it is considered that the residual impact of deveon the local and strategic highway network will not be severe and t

sustainable transport policies of the NPPF.


33/409


7 CONCLUSIONS7.1.1 This TA has been prepared in support of a planning application f

maximum of 400 new residential dwellings, a 210 pupil Primary Sc

Centre on land to the south of Shelford Road in Radcliffe on Trent, No

7.1.2 Access to the site will be provided via a new 3-arm roundabout junctiroundabout has been designed in accordance with relevant

complimented by an extension of the existing 30mph speed limit fur

Shelford Road and the provision of village gateway treatment to Shelf

7.1.3 The development proposals are in keeping with the policy objectivesthe emerging Rushcliffe Development Framework and the Notting

Plan 3.

7.1.4 The site is well located in an existing residential area, is close to exisinfrastructure and is accessible for pedestrians, cyclists and bus use

close proximity to Radcliffe on Trent village centre where resident

educational, retail, employment and leisure purposes.

7.1.5 The location of the site is such that existing sustainable travel oppThe highway network is such that local journeys, particularly within

be undertaken on foot or by cycle.

7.1.6 The proposed development includes for the followinmeasures/improvements:

A S106 contribution of 300,000 towards local bus servicewith provision for bus penetration of the site and a bus

WYG T t Pl i


34/409


Provision of New Household Sustainable Travel Packs for eac7.1.7 The proposed site access junction would operate with sufficient spa

assessment year. A number of off-site highway junctions have also b

year with development scenario and the following highway improvem

Conversion of the existing Shelford Road/Main Road mini-rousignal control, including provision of controlled pedestrian cro

Capacity improvements at the A52/Nottingham Road signal ju Capacity improvements at the A52/Stragglethorpe Road signa A S106 contribution of 200,000 towards the provision of

along Shelford Road; and

S106 contribution of 27,000 towards a traffic management/Newton.

7.1.8 In transportation terms, it is considered that, subject to delivery of travel measures/initiatives and highway improvements, there are no

the proposed development that should prevent the granting of planni

WYG T t Pl i


35/409


Date

Date

ecked

Approved

wingNo.

Revision

WYG

C

26/10/12

ASG

29/10/12

001

-

BY

CHKAPP

DATE

GroupLtd.

ataC

rowncopyright

ation


36/409

JJC

26/10/12

A079137

ProjectNo.

Scale@

Drawn

Date

Che

Dra

Office

Type

Project:

DrawingTitle:

EXECUTIVEPARK

AVALONWAY

ANSTEY

LEICESTER

LE77GR

TEL:

+44(0)1162348000

FAX:

+44(0)1162348001

e-mail:

[email protected]

18

JI

NTS

35

REV

DESCRIPTION

SHELFORDROADFARM,

RADCLIFFE-ON-TRENT

FIGURE1

SITELOCATIONPLAN

Client:

ContainsOrdnanceSurveyda

anddatabaseright2012.

WILLIAMDAVISLTD

0

100

200

300

400M

etre

s

Legend S

iteLoca

A3


37/409

Date

Date

Checked

Approved

DrawingNo.

Revision

WYG

JIC

06/11/12

ASG

06/11/12

003

-

BY

CHKAPP

DATE

GroupLtd.

, ENT

dataC

rowncopyright

cation

alkingCatchment


38/409

JJC

06/11/12

A079137

ProjectNo.

Scale@

Drawn

Date

C D

Office

Type

Project:

DrawingTitle:

EXECUTIVEPARK

AVALONWAY

ANSTEY

LEICESTER

LE77GR

TEL:

+44(0)1162348000

FAX:

+44(0)1162348001

e-mail:

[email protected]

18

NTS

35

REV

DESCRIPTION

SHELFORDROADFARM,

RADCLIFFE-ON-TRENT

FIGURE3

2KMWALKINGCATCHM

Client:

ContainsOrdnanceSurveyd


WILLIAMDAVISLTD

0

200

400

600

800M

etre

s

Legend S

iteLoc

2kmWa

A3

Date

Date

Checked

Approved

DrawingNo.

Revision

WYG

JIC

06/11/12

ASG

06/11/12

004

-

BY

CHKAPP

DATE

GroupLtd.

M, E

NT

dataC

rowncopyright

cation

yclingCatchment


39/409

JJC

06/11/12

A079137

ProjectNo.

Scale@

Drawn

Date

Office

Type

Project:

DrawingTitle:

EXECUTIVEPARK

AVALONWAY

ANSTEY

LEICESTER

LE77GR

TEL:

+44(0)1162348000

FAX:

+44(0)1162348001

e-mail:

[email protected]

18

NTS

35

REV

DESCRIPTION

SHELFORDROADFARM

RADCLIFFE-ON-TRENT

FIGURE4

4KMCYCLINGCATCHM

Client:

ContainsOrdnanceSurvey


WILLIAMDAVISLTD

0

400

800

1,2

00

1,6

00M

etre

s

Legend S

iteLo

4kmCy

A3


40/409


41/409


42/409


43/409


44/409


45/409


46/409



47/409

p g

Appendix A Shelford Road Vehicle S


48/409

VehicleSpeedSurveyAnalysi

s

Client

WilliamDavisLtd

Site

ShelfordRoad

Direction

Southbound

Day

Tuesday

Date

30/10/2012

Time

09:20-11:10

W

eather

Dry/dull

IN

PUTDATAHERE(Max200persite)

LISTALLREADINGS

38

35

34

30

30

27

25

29

31

27

28

30

28

39

31

41

29

37

23

30

29

38

30

28

28

34

31

29

30

29

34

32

25

28

32

31

45

34

25

31

29

28

32

30

26

33

26

30

29

28

30

35

32

29

29

32

33

28

32

38

33

29

31

27

29

30

25

26

31

37

39

33

28

33

26

26

29

27

33

30

25

27

37

33

35

32

36

37

24

30

39

30

35

28

24

26

36

29

29

37

35

31

39

30

28

30

31

26

31

27

26

27

27

35

27

38

25

40

27

31

27

26

28

31

27

28

28

32

33

35

28

32

29

29

28

24

25

28

34

28

Min

23.0mph

Max

45.0mph

Median

29.0mph

Total

2964.0

Counts

100

Average

29.64mph

StdDev

3.93

meanplusstddev)

85%ile

33.57

Iflessthan200samples(meanplu

sstddev)

owance)

IfDry

2.49mph

(deductforwetweatherallowance)

85%

wet

31.0

8mph

Lessthan200samples

ed

Equals

50.02kph

85th%ilewetweatherspeed


49/409

VehicleSpeedSurveyAnalysis

C

lient

WilliamDavisLtd

Site

ShelfordRoad

Direction

Southbound

Day

Thursday

Date

01/11/12

Time

12:30-13:55

W

eather

Dull/dry

IN

PUTDATAHERE(Max200persite)

LISTALLREADINGS

38

35

30

30

40

29

29

26

35

43

29

31

30

28

36

35

34

27

36

32

31

31

29

30

36

36

36

31

34

33

31

31

28

31

32

31

28

35

32

31

34

29

28

30

35

35

35

32

34

29

40

27

31

32

31

32

31

39

41

32

30

38

38

28

29

32

30

27

29

29

33

29

43

42

42

27

26

30

35

36

28

41

44

32

37

31

33

35

32

29

32

28

35

34

36

33

32

29

48

36

31

31

30

33

40

23

27

27

29

29

25

33

33

38

27

35

33

28

33

29

40

29

32

25

27

23

26

31

29

35

33

29

44

43

38

32

36

45

30

29

Min

23.0mph

Max

45.0mph

Median

31.0mph

Total

3207.0

Counts

100

Average

32.07mph

StdDev

4.72

meanplusstddev)

85%ile

36.79

Iflessthan200samples(meanplu

sstddev)

owance)

IfDry

2.49mph

(deductforwetweatherallowance

)

85%

wet

34.3

0mph

Lessthan200samples

ed

Equals

55.20kph

85th%ilewetweatherspeed



50/409

Appendix B Traffic C


51/409

N

Forand

on

behalfof:


52/409

N

Forand

on

behalfof:


53/409

08/11/20

12

//

09170919

2

1

2

2

1

2

1

2


54/409

08/11/20

12

//

2

1

2

2

1

2

3

4


55/409

08/11/20

12

//

2

1

2

2

1

2

5

6


56/409

08/11/20

12

//

2

1

2

2

1

2

7

8


57/409

08/11/20

12

//

2

1

2

2

1

2

9

10


58/409

08/11/20

12

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2

11

12


59/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2

13

14


60/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2

15

16


61/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2


62/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2


63/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2


64/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

2

2

1

2


65/409

08/11/2012

/

/

2

1

/

/

/

2

/

1

A52 Nottingham - Manual Traffic Survey, Thursday 21 J8 Notti J8 J8 A52 J8 J8 N/A 7 1 ## FALSE FALS

Produced by Road Data Services Ltd.


66/409

Junction: (8) Nottingham Road / A52 Grantham Road

Vehicle Class:

Start Time:

End Time:

3980 19

4204 30

11645 11223

Note: The above diagram represents the Junction surveyed although m

A52 Grantham

Road (East)

NottinghamRoad

A52 Grantham

Road (West)

ALL CLASSES

1) 0700

1) 1900

Peak Hour


67/409


68/409

ngham-Ma

nualTrafficSurvey,T

hursday2ndJuly200

9

oadDataServicesL

td.

NottinghamRoad/A52GranthamRoad

2GranthamRoad(East)

YCLE

M/CYCLE

CAR

LGV

OGV1

OGV2

BUS

TOTAL

P/CYCLE

M/CYCLE

CAR

LGV

OGV1

OGV2

BUS

TOTAL

0

4

223

26

9

12

1

275

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

259

30

12

11

2

318

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

268

24

12

10

2

320

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

278

22

11

11

3

332

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

19

102

8

102

44

44

8

1245

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

267

22

16

10

7

324

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

3

247

22

9

13

4

298

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

228

23

12

11

4

279

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

4

223

24

9

17

2

279

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

10

965

91

46

51

17

1180

0

0

2

1

0

0

0

3

0

1

228

23

14

12

1

279

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

2

222

34

12

12

1

283

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

233

32

10

12

0

289

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

2

224

16

12

11

3

268

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

907

105

48

47

5

1119

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

2

0

4

212

21

15

9

2

263

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

1

173

29

18

11

2

234

0

0

1

0

2

0

0

3

0

0

184

23

13

14

2

236

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

159

26

22

17

2

227

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

728

99

68

51

8

960

0

0

2

1

2

0

0

5

0

1

157

24

16

9

2

209

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

2

0

0

140

33

19

21

2

215

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

139

23

13

10

1

187

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

126

21

16

13

2

178

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

2

562

101

64

53

7

789

0

0

4

1

0

0

0

5

0

2

151

22

16

12

1

204

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

2

152

33

13

15

1

216

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

4

151

27

21

20

1

224

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

144

31

14

16

2

207

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

598

113

64

63

5

851

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

2

0

4

148

30

15

15

1

213

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

154

22

12

10

1

200

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

152

20

10

12

2

197

0

0

2

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

141

31

21

10

2

206

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

7

595

103

58

47

6

816

0

0

5

0

0

0

0

5

0

0

138

24

14

15

2

193

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

150

24

13

12

1

201

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

144

39

13

14

2

213

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

132

31

15

16

5

199

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

564

118

55

57

10

806

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

150

20

13

10

6

199

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

2

134

33

15

11

2

197

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

137

33

14

9

2

195

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

W

/BtoA52GranthamRoad(West)

RighttoNottinghamRoad


69/409

A52 Nottingham - Manual Traffic Survey, Thursday 22 J7 A52 J7 J7 A52 J7 J7 N/A 7 1 ## FALSE FALS



70/409

Junction: (7) A52 Radcliffe Road / Stragglethorpe Road

Vehicle Class:

Start Time:

End Time:

14934 14253

2120 947

2504 912


A52 Radcliffe

Road (East)

Str

agglethorpeRoad

A52 Radcliffe

Road (West)

ALL CLASSES

1) 0700

1) 1900

Peak Hour


71/409


72/409

ngham-Ma

nualTrafficSurvey,T

hursday2ndJuly200

9

oadDataServicesLtd.

A52RadcliffeRoad/StragglethorpeRoad

agglethorpeRoad

YCLE

M/CYCLE

CA

R

LGV

OGV1

OGV2

BUS

TOTAL

P/CYCLE

M/CYCLE

CAR

LGV

OGV1

OGV2

BUS

TOTAL

0

2

46

6

0

0

0

54

0

1

3

4

1

0

0

9

0

0

74

4

4

0

1

83

0

0

9

0

1

0

0

10

0

1

71

12

2

0

2

88

0

0

7

1

0

0

0

8

0

1

74

6

5

1

0

87

0

0

10

0

1

0

1

12

0

4

265

28

11

1

3

312

0

1

29

5

3

0

1

39

0

0

94

8

2

1

3

108

0

0

18

2

0

0

7

27

0

1

77

6

4

0

1

89

0

0

13

1

0

1

0

15

1

2

67

7

1

2

1

81

1

0

16

1

1

0

0

19

0

1

54

5

1

1

1

63

0

0

15

0

1

0

0

16

1

4

292

26

8

4

6

341

1

0

62

4

2

1

7

77

0

1

64

10

3

0

0

78

1

0

17

4

0

0

0

22

0

0

74

7

2

0

1

84

0

1

17

2

1

0

0

21

0

0

46

7

1

1

0

55

1

1

17

2

2

0

0

23

0

1

37

4

3

0

1

46

0

0

16

5

2

0

0

23

0

2

221

28

9

1

2

263

2

2

67

13

5

0

0

89

0

0

39

9

0

2

1

51

0

0

10

5

0

0

0

15

0

1

35

7

1

1

1

46

0

0

9

1

0

0

0

10

0

1

33

3

1

2

0

40

0

0

16

2

0

0

0

18

0

0

35

7

3

2

1

48

1

0

18

0

0

0

0

19

0

2

142

26

5

7

3

185

1

0

53

8

0

0

0

62

0

1

30

6

3

0

1

41

0

0

13

0

1

0

0

14

0

0

27

6

4

0

1

38

0

0

10

3

1

0

0

14

0

1

33

5

3

2

0

44

0

0

12

1

3

0

0

16

0

0

25

5

1

0

1

32

0

1

16

0

2

0

0

19

0

2

115

22

11

2

3

155

0

1

51

4

7

0

0

63

0

0

42

6

0

0

1

49

0

0

10

3

0

0

0

13

0

0

27

4

2

1

2

36

0

0

13

1

3

0

0

17

0

0

35

4

1

1

0

41

2

0

12

2

0

0

0

16

0

2

35

9

3

0

2

51

0

0

13

0

0

0

0

13

0

2

139

23

6

2

5

177

2

0

48

6

3

0

0

59

0

0

21

7

0

1

0

29

0

0

14

5

0

0

0

19

0

0

42

7

1

2

1

53

1

0

12

2

0

0

0

15

0

1

37

3

1

0

1

43

0

1

9

4

2

0

0

16

0

0

44

4

3

2

0

53

0

0

10

3

0

1

0

14

0

1

144

21

5

5

2

178

1

1

45

14

2

1

0

64

0

1

30

5

1

2

1

40

0

0

19

2

0

0

1

22

0

0

38

6

1

0

2

47

0

1

14

4

0

0

0

19

0

1

32

5

3

1

1

43

0

0

12

4

0

0

0

16

0

1

28

11

2

1

1

44

0

0

9

0

0

0

0

9

0

3

128

27

7

4

5

174

0

1

54

10

0

0

1

66

0

0

37

6

0

2

2

47

0

3

14

2

0

0

0

19

0

0

34

1

1

0

0

36

0

0

23

5

0

0

0

28

0

0

30

3

1

0

2

36

0

0

15

3

1

0

0

19

L

efttoA52RadcliffeRoad(West)

Righ

ttoA52RadcliffeRoad(East)


73/409

A52 Nottingham - Manual Traffic Survey, Thursday 213 J6 Trav J6 J6 A52 J6 J6 N/A 7 1 ## FALSE FALS


Junction: (6) Gamston Roundabout


74/409

Junction: (6) Gamston Roundabout

Vehicle Class:

Start Time:

End Time:

20 49 21

19

8143 19

2953 8108

8587

2946 55 8830


A52 Radcliffe RoadA6011 Radcliffe Road

TravellerSite

A52Gamston

LingsBarRd

ALL CLASSES

1) 0700

1) 1900

Peak Hour


75/409


76/409


77/409


78/409



79/409

Appendix C 2013 Junction Capacity


80/409
http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk/mailto:[email protected]


81/409


82/409


83/409


84/409


85/409


86/409


87/409


88/409
http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk/mailto:[email protected]


89/409


90/409


91/409


92/409


93/409


94/409


95/409

Full Input Data And Results


User and Project Details

Project:

Title:

Location:


96/409

File name: Radcliffe Notts.lsg3x

Author:

Company:

Address:

Notes:

Network Layout Diagram

A52/Nottingham Rd

Arm 1 -

1

2

3

1/1

1/2

1/3

Arm

1

2

3

2/1

2/2

2/3

Arm

3-No

ttingh

amRd

12 3

/13/2

Arm

4-

1

4/1

Arm 6 -

1

2

6/1

6/2

A

Intergreens to phase C and Phase Cminimum green reduced to reflectfrequency of appearance due to lowdemand


Phase Diagram


97/409

A

Phase Input Data

Phase Name Phase Type Assoc. Phase Street Min Cont Min

A Traffic 7 7

B Traffic 7 7

C Traffic 1 1

D Traffic 7 7

Phase Intergreens Matrix

Starting Phase

A B C D

A 2 8


Stage Diagram

A

B

C

D

1 Min >= 7

A

B

C

D

2 Min >= 0

A

B

C

D

3 Min >= 7


98/409

Phase Delays

Term. Stage Start Stage Phase Type Value Cont value

There are no Phase Delays defined

Prohibited Stage Change

To Stage

FromStage

1 2 3

1 2 8

2 8 8

3 7 7


99/409

FullInp

utDataAndResults

Give-W

ayLaneInputData

Junctio

n:A52/NottinghamRd

Therea

renoOpposedLanesinthisJunction


Lane Input Data

Junction: A52/Nottingham Rd

LaneLaneType

PhasesStartDisp.

EndDisp.

PhysicalLength(PCU)

SatFlowType

Def UserSaturation

Flow(PCU/Hr)

LaneWidth

(m)Gradie

1/1 U A 2 3 14.0 Geom - 4.00 0.00


100/409

1/2 U A 2 3 110.0 Geom - 3.50 0.00

1/3 U A 2 3 110.0 Geom - 3.20 0.00

2/1

(A52Grantham

Rd)

U B 2 3 60.0 Geom - 3.20 0.00

2/2(A52

GranthamRd)

U B 2 3 60.0 Geom - 3.60 0.00

2/3(A52

GranthamRd)

U C 2 3 9.0 Geom - 4.00 0.00

3/1(Nottingham

Rd)U D 2 3 3.0 Geom - 2.80 0.00

3/2(Nottingham

Rd)U D 2 3 60.0 Geom - 2.80 0.00

4/1 U 2 3 60.0 Inf - - -

5/1 U 2 3 60.0 Inf - - -

5/2 U 2 3 60.0 Inf - - -

6/1 U 2 3 10.0 Inf - - -

6/2 U 2 3 10.0 Inf - - -

Traffic Flow Groups

Flow Group Start Time End Time Duration Formula


101/409


Lane Saturation Flows


LaneLaneWidth

(m)Gradient

NearsideLane

AllowedTurns

TurningRadius

(m)

TurningProp.

Sat Flo(PCU/H

1/1 4.00 0.00 Y Arm 4 Ahead 18.00 100.0 % 1860


102/409

1/2 3.50 0.00 Y Arm 5 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 1965

1/3 3.20 0.00 N Arm 5 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 2075

2/1(A52 Grantham Rd)

3.20 0.00 Y Arm 6 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 1935


3.60 0.00 N Arm 6 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 2115


4.00 0.00 Y Arm 4 U-Turn 14.00 100.0 % 1820

3/1(Nottingham Rd)

2.80 0.00 YArm 5 U-Turn 7.00 0.0 %

1788 Arm 6 Ahead 25.00 100.0 %

3/2(Nottingham Rd)

2.80 0.00 Y Arm 6 Ahead 25.00 100.0 % 1788

4/1 Infinite Saturation Flow Inf





Scenario 2: '2013 PM Base'(FG2: '2013 PM Base', Plan 1: 'Network Control Plan 1')

Traffic Flows, DesiredDesired Flow :

Destination

Origin

A B C Tot.

A 0 720 1410 2130

B 297 0 1 298

C 968 2 0 970

Tot. 1265 722 1411 3398


Traffic Lane Flows

LaneScenario 2:

2013 PM Base


1/1(short) 720

1/2 1283(In)


103/409

1/2(with short)

1283(In)563(Out)

1/3 847

2/1 445

2/2(with short)

525(In)523(Out)

2/3(short)

2

3/1(short)

156

3/2(with short)

298(In)142(Out)

4/1 722

5/1 564

5/2 847

6/1 600

6/2 665

Lane Saturation Flows


LaneLaneWidth

(m)Gradient

NearsideLane

AllowedTurns

TurningRadius

(m)

TurningProp.

Sat Flo(PCU/H

1/1 4.00 0.00 Y Arm 4 Ahead 18.00 100.0 % 1860

1/2 3.50 0.00 Y Arm 5 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 1965

1/3 3.20 0.00 N Arm 5 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 2075

2/1

(A52 Grantham Rd)3.20 0.00 Y Arm 6 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 1935


3.60 0.00 N Arm 6 Ahead Inf 100.0 % 2115

2/3


Scenario 1: '2013 AM Base'(FG1: '2013 AM Base', Plan 1: 'Network Control Plan 1')

Stage Sequence Diagram

A

B

1 Min: 7

7 35s

B

C

2 Min: 1

2 1s

D

3 Min: 7

8 37s


104/409

Stage Timings

Stage 1 2 3

Duration 35 1 37

Change Point 0 42 45

Signal Timings Diagram

0

0

10

10

20

20

30

30

40

40

50

50

60

60

70

70

8

8

Time in cycle (sec)

Phases

1 7 : 350

22 : 142

3 8 : 3745

DCBA

-A52G

rantham

Rd

79.7%

668

81.5%

747

81.5%

1

371

339

Arm

5-

1 2

0.0

0.0%

0.0

0.0%

B

C


105/409

FullInp

utDataAndResults

Netwo

rkLayoutDiagram

A52/Nottingham

Rd

PRC:9.7%

TotalTrafficDelay:3

0.9pcuHr

Arm1-

1 2 3

78.8%

265

13.4

78.8%

556

13.7

72.0%

598

Arm

2-

123

16.2

18.3

Arm3

-Nottin

ghamR

d

12

82.0

%

14.7

82.0

%

Arm

4-

1

0.0

0.0%

266

556

598

Arm

6-

12

0.0

0.0%

1039

0.0

0.0%

1086

A

B

IntergreenstophaseCa

ndPhaseC

minimumg

reenreduced

toreflect

frequencyofappearance

duetolow

demand

and(pcu)

S

atFlow

(p

cu/Hr)

Capacity

(pcu)

DegSat

(%)

-

-

-

82.0%

-

-

-

82.0%

21

1965:1860

705+336

78.8:

78.8%

98

2075

830

72.0%

68

1935

839

79.7%

48

2115:1820

916+1

81.5:

81.5%

10

1788:1788

413+452

82.0:

82.0%

66

Inf

Inf

0.0%

56

Inf

Inf

0.0%

98

Inf

Inf

0.0%

039

Inf

Inf

0.0%

086

Inf

Inf

0.0%


106/409

FullInp

utDataAndResults

Netwo

rkResults

Item

Lane

Description

Lane

Type

Controller

Stream

PositionIn

FilteredRoute

FullPhase

Arrow

Phase

Num

Greens

TotalGreen

(s)

Arrow

Green(s)

Dema

Flow

Network

-

-

N/A

-

-

-

-

-

A52/No

ttingham

Rd

-

-

N/A

-

-

-

-

-

1/2+1/1

AheadAhead2

U

N/A

N/A

A

1

35

-

82

1/3

Ahead

U

N/A

N/A

A

1

35

-

59

2/1

A52Grantham

RdAhead

U

N/A

N/A

B

1

38

-

66

2/2+2/3

A52Grantham

RdU-Turn

Ahead

U

N/A

N/A

B

C

1

38:1

-

74

3/2+3/1

NottinghamR

d

U-TurnAhead

U

N/A

N/A

D

1

37

-

7

4/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

26

5/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

55

5/2

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

59

6/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

10

6/2

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

10

Delay

PCU

cu)

M

ax.Backof

U

niform

Q

ueue(pcu)

Rand+

Oversat

Queue(pcu)

Mean

Max

Queue

(pcu)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

29.4

11.6

1.8

13.4

30.4

12.5

1.3

13.7

32.4

14.3

1.9

16.2

32.7

16.2

2.1

18.3

32.0

12.4

2.2

14.7

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

s):

90


107/409

FullInp

utDataAndResults

Item

Arriving(pcu)

Leaving

(pcu)

TurnersIn

Gaps(pcu)

TurnersWhen

Unopposed

(pcu)

TurnersIn

Intergreen

(pcu)

Uniform

Delay

(pcuHr)

Rand+

Oversat

Delay

(pcuHr)

Sto

rageArea

Uniform

Delay

(pc

uHr)

Total

Delay

(pcuHr)

Av.D

PerP

(s/pc

Network

-

-

0

0

0

21.5

9.4

0.0

30.9

A52/No

ttingham

Rd

-

-

0

0

0

21.5

9.4

0.0

30.9

1/2+1/1

821

821

-

-

-

4.9

1.8

-

6.7

2

1/3

598

598

-

-

-

3.8

1.3

-

5.1

3

2/1

668

668

-

-

-

4.1

1.9

-

6.0

3

2/2+2/3

748

748

-

-

-

4.6

2.1

-

6.8

3

3/2+3/1

710

710

-

-

-

4.1

2.2

-

6.3

3

4/1

266

266

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0

5/1

556

556

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0

5/2

598

598

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0

6/1

1039

1039

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0

6/2

1086

1086

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0

C1

PRCforSignalledLanes(%):

9.7

TotalDelayforSignalledLanes(pcuH

r):

30.89

CycleTime(s

PRCOverAllLanes(%):

9.7

TotalDelayOverAllLanes(pcuH

r):

30.89

Full Input Data And ResultsScenario 2: '2013 PM Base'(FG2: '2013 PM Base', Plan 1: 'Network Control Plan 1')

Stage Sequence Diagram

A

B

1 Min: 7

7 58s

B

C

2 Min: 1

2 1s

D

3 Min: 7

8 14s


108/409

Stage Timings

Stage 1 2 3

Duration 58 1 14

Change Point 0 65 68

Signal Timings Diagram

0

0

10

10

20

20

30

30

40

40

50

50

60

60

70

70

8

8

Time in cycle (sec)

Phases

1 7 : 58

0

22 : 1

65

3 8 :

68

DCBA

2-A52Grantham

Rd

33.4%

445

35.9%

523

35.9%

2

15614

2

Arm

5-

1 2

0.0

0.0%

0.0

0.0%

B

C


109/409

FullInputDataAndResults

Netwo

rkLayoutDiagram

A52/Nottingham

Rd

PRC:17.5%

TotalTrafficDelay:1

3.7pcuHr

Arm1-

1 2 3

76.6%

720

11.6

76.6%

563

13.1

62.3%

847

Arm

2

123

4.7

5.7

Arm3

-Nottin

ghamR

d

12

73.1

%

5.5

73.1

%

Arm4

-

1

0.0

0.0%

722

564

847

Arm

6-

12

0.0

0.0%

600

0.0

0.0%

665

A

IntergreenstophaseCandPhaseC

minimumg

reenreduced

toreflect

frequencyofappearance

duetolow

demand

mand

ow(pcu)

S

atFlow

(pcu/Hr)

Capacity

(pcu)

DegSat

(%)

-

-

-

76.6%

-

-

-

76.6%

1283

1965:1860

735+940

76.6:

76.6%

847

2075

1360

62.3%

445

1935

1333

33.4%

525

2115:1820

1457+6

35.9:

35.9%

298

1788:1786

194+214

73.1:

73.1%

722

Inf

Inf

0.0%

564

Inf

Inf

0.0%

847

Inf

Inf

0.0%

600

Inf

Inf

0.0%

665

Inf

Inf

0.0%


110/409


NetworkResults

Item

Lane

Description

Lane

Type

Controller

Stream

PositionIn

FilteredRoute

FullP

hase

Arrow

Phase

Num

Greens

TotalGreen

(s)

Arrow

Green(s)

Dem

Flo

Network

-

-

N/A

-

-

-

-

-

A52/Nottingham

Rd

-

-

N/A

-

-

-

-

-

1/2+1/1

AheadAhead2

U

N/A

N/A

A

1

58

-

1/3

Ahead

U

N/A

N/A

A

1

58

-

2/1

A52Grantham

RdAhead

U

N/A

N/A

B

1

61

-

2/2+2/3

A52Grantham

RdU-Turn

Ahead

U

N/A

N/A

B

C

1

61:1

-

3/2+3/1

NottinghamR

d

U-TurnAhead

U

N/A

N/A

D

1

14

-

4/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

5/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

5/2

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

6/1

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

6/2

U

N/A

N/A

-

-

-

-

v.Delay

erPCU

pcu)

M

ax.Backof

U

niform

Q

ueue(pcu)

Rand+

Oversat

Queue(pcu)

Mean

Max

Queue

(pcu)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

12.7

10.0

1.6

11.6

12.5

12.2

0.8

13.1

7.7

4.4

0.3

4.7

7.9

5.4

0.3

5.7

50.2

4.1

1.3

5.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

e(s):

90


111/409


Item

Arriving(pcu)

Leaving

(pcu)

TurnersIn

Gaps(pcu)

TurnersWhen

Unopposed

(pcu)

Turne

rsIn

Interg

reen

(pcu)

Uniform

Delay

(pcuHr)

Rand+

Oversat

Delay

(pcuHr)

StorageArea

Un

iform

De

lay

(pc

uHr)

Total

Delay

(pcuHr)

AvPe(s/

Network

-

-

0

0

0

9.4

4.3

0.0

13.7

A52/Nottingham

Rd

-

-

0

0

0

9.4

4.3

0.0

13.7

1/2+1/1

1283

1283

-

-

-

2.9

1.6

-

4.5

1/3

847

847

-

-

-

2.1

0.8

-

2.9

2/1

445

445

-

-

-

0.7

0.3

-

1.0

2/2+2/3

525

525

-

-

-

0.9

0.3

-

1.1

3/2+3/1

298

298

-

-

-

2.8

1.3

-

4.2

4/1

722

722

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

5/1

564

564

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

5/2

847

847

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

6/1

600

600

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

6/2

665

665

-

-

-

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

C1

PRCforSignalledLanes(%):

17.5

TotalDelayforSignalledLanes(pcuH

r):

13.73

CycleTime

PRCOverAllLanes(%):

17.5

TotalDelayOverAllLanes(pcuH

r):

File 19 Traffic Transport Assessment

Documents

Transcript of File 19 Traffic Transport Assessment